Hi Folks
check the artical again they are all in there, not all in the the same para.
They're not currently.
Text the article currently contains -
Acknowledging that pilots can easily find themselves under financial pressure to proceed with a flight in challenging conditions, Norton said that there is anecdotal evidence of over-confidence among some flight crew.
What GF posted, infering the text to be a quote of the article -
Norton said that pilots can easily find themselves under financial pressure to proceed with a flight in challenging conditions and that there is anecdotal evidence of over-confidence among some flight crew.
Sorry to appear pedantic
"Acknowledging" is not the same as having "said".
Such mis-attributions can have reputationally damaging consequences.
Entirely hypothetically -
taking an
extreme perspective,
a
fictional conversation could run as follows -
Journalist - I've heard it said - That you are a bunch of cocky barstewards, just in it for the money, who'll fly in any conditions.
Respondent - Thats anecdotal.
Hypothetically, you could extrapolate that acknowledgement
into the text contained in the original article.
My point was
a "quote" is no longer a valid "quote"
if its been selectively edited / rewritten to match some POV.
